Tuesday, October 20, 2015

Contact: Dan Schroeder, 801-xxx-xxxx, dvs1444@gmail.com
Records recently released by the Utah Attorney General’s office clearly show what local activists long suspected: that the mysterious entity Friends of Northern Utah Real Estate, which was used to hide the origin of more than $20,000 in campaign contributions during Ogden’s 2007 municipal election, was operated by Blain Johnson, the local real estate attorney who was elected to the city council in that race.
The newly released records include copies of the five canceled checks from Envision Ogden, an organization founded in early 2007, to FNURE. Johnson’s signature is clearly visible on the backs of three of these checks, indicating that he personally endorsed the checks on behalf of FNURE. No signature is visible on the backs of the other two checks, but all five were deposited at Key Bank, where Johnson also deposited an earlier check written directly from Envision Ogden to his own campaign.
Of the FNURE funds, $10,990 was then passed on to Johnson’s campaign, while $9,700 went to council candidate Royal Eccles. Johnson served on the council for two years before stepping down at the end of 2009; Eccles was defeated in 2007 by incumbent council member Amy Wicks.
In their financial disclosure statements filed with the city during the 2007 campaign season, both Johnson and Eccles listed only FNURE as the origin of these funds. Johnson listed the address of FNURE as 4723 Harrison Blvd., in the same building where he then worked as a partner with the law firm Smith Knowles.
Envision Ogden was headed by local realtor Abraham Shreve, ostensibly to promote business and recreation in the Ogden area. With considerable help from then-mayor Matthew Godfrey, the organization held two large fundraising events that year and raised over $87,000, mostly from local businesses. Although Shreve later stated that it was always Envision Ogden’s intent to get involved in local politics, Envision Ogden did not register as a political organization with the state or the IRS until the following year, and none of its contributors seem to have been aware of its political nature.
The five payments from Envision Ogden to FNURE first came to light in early 2009, when local activist Dan Schroeder found them listed on Envision Ogden’s belatedly filed IRS disclosures. Schroeder then filed a complaint with City Attorney Gary Williams, who allowed Johnson and Eccles to amend their financial disclosure statements to indicate that the FNURE funds actually came from Envision Ogden. Williams, who was appointed by Godfrey, then pronounced the problem “cured” and took no further action.
In news articles covering these events, the Salt Lake Tribune reported that Johnson could not “come up with the names of anyone associated with [FNURE]”, while the Ogden Standard-Examiner reported that “Johnson said FNURE was established by some employees of a title company who have an office in the building where he works, but declined to identify the employees or the firm.”
As a result of these press reports, the Utah State Bureau of Investigation opened a criminal investigation of possible “financial fraud” and “public corruption” in May 2009. During the SBI investigation, both Shreve and Envision Ogden treasurer Jeff Lucas told the investigator that FNURE was connected to Johnson.
The investigation was later transferred to the Utah Attorney General’s office, which obtained Envision Ogden’s bank records through a subpoena to Wells Fargo Bank. After reviewing those records, the Attorney General closed the investigation without bringing any charges in March 2011.
As soon as the investigation was closed, Schroeder filed a government records request for the Attorney General’s investigation records, including the bank records. A lengthy administrative and legal battle ensued over access to the records, culminating in the Utah Supreme Court’s August decision that ordered the records’ release.
Besides the canceled FNURE checks, the released records help fill in a few other details about Envision Ogden’s activities:
* Envision Ogden’s Business Account Application with Wells Fargo Bank indicates that the account was opened by Lucas in January 2007, and that he identified Envision Ogden as a “Political Action Group”. It also shows that although he provided personal identification, he provided no documents to verify Envision Ogden’s existence.
* The bank records include a February 2008 deposit of 19 checks, each for $100, that were written during mid-2007. Most of these checks were from businesses, and several were made out to Amer Sports or to Envision Ogden at Amer’s address. These contributions are consistent with a solicitation that went out in June 2007, asking businesses to contribute $100 in return for a listing in a relocation handbook to be provided to Amer employees. The solicitation stated that contributions should be sent to Cindy Patterson, who was working for Amer at the time. Patterson’s husband is John Patterson, who was then Ogden’s chief administrative officer.
* The bank records also include 18 checks, ranging from $32 to $108 and totaling $1558, written to individuals on or around the date of the November 2007 election. Most of these checks have the notation “campaign help” or “campaign support”. Two other checks from October 2007, each for $100, are for campaign signs. Together with Envision Ogden’s previously reported political expenditures, these payments bring its total political expenditures to more than $34,000. (The other political expenditures were to SOS staffing for election day help, to 2008 legislative candidate Jeremy Peterson, and to the Utah Republican Party.) Nearly all the rest of Envision Ogden’s funds were paid to cover expenses of its two fundraising events and to develop its web site.
* Finally, the bank records include a $6047 check to Envision Ogden, deposited on October 10, 2007, from the Ben Lomond Hotel. The amount and date of this check match those of a contribution that Envision Ogden had previously reported from UBS Financial Services. UBS told the SBI investigator that its internal protocols would not allow it to contribute directly to Envision Ogden, so it wrote a check for $6047 to the Ben Lomond Hotel instead, supposedly to reimburse expenses of one of Envision Ogden’s fundraising events. While it had previously appeared that Envision Ogden might have simply deposited the UBS check into its own account, it is now apparent that the Ben Lomond Hotel played an active role in this questionable transfer of funds.
On the other hand, the newly released records shed little light on the workings of the Utah Attorney General’s office. There is no clear indication of what the AG investigator was looking for in the bank records, or of why the investigation was closed soon after the bank records had been reviewed. There is no indication of why the investigator never questioned Johnson or Eccles or Godfrey, or why no further attempt was made to question Shreve. And there is no indication of why these records were withheld from the public for more than four years after the investigation was closed, necessitating a lengthy administrative battle, a lawsuit, and an appeal to the Utah Supreme Court to obtain their release.

Monday, August 17, 2015

The following candidates have The following candiddates have clear the Primary Election and have qualifed to stand for the Ogden Municipal Regular Election, which is set for Novemebr 3, 2015. Please click the highlighted links for Declaration of Candidacy information concerning these 2015 Ogden Municipal Election Candidates, together with all available information, concerning their respective candidadacies:

Monday, June 08, 2015

The following candidates have filed their Declarations of Candidacy for the Ogden City Elected seats indicated below. The below-listed candidates who face opposition will stand for the Primary Election set for August 11, 2015. Please click the highlighted links for Declaration of Candidacy information concerning these 2015 Ogden Municipal Election Candidates, together with all available information, concerning their respective candidadacies:

The Utah Supreme Court will soon hear oral arguments in a four-year-long dispute over records of the Attorney General’s criminal investigation of Envision Ogden, a mysterious political group formed in 2007.

Envision Ogden was organized in early 2007, ostensibly to promote economic development and recreation in Ogden. The group quickly raised over $87,000 in donations, much of it from businesses and other organizations including banks, hospitals, the Ogden-Weber Chamber of Commerce, and the Governor’s Office of Economic Development. Then-mayor Matthew Godfrey solicited most of the major contributions to the group.

Unknown to the donors, however, Envision Ogden then funneled most of its net revenue--over $30,000--to political candidates and to the Utah Republican Party. Over $20,000 of these funds went to two Godfrey-supported city council candidates, who reported that they received the funds not from Envision Ogden but from an even more mysterious, unregistered entity called Friends of Northern Utah Real Estate. Envision Ogden further concealed its political nature by failing to register as a 527 political organization with the IRS until 2008, after its fundraising activities had ceased. (The name “Envision Ogden” may also have been intended to deceive donors, some of whom confused the group with Envision Utah, an unrelated nonprofit organization that promotes long-term urban planning.)

When Envision Ogden’s political nature was discovered in 2009, the Attorney General’s Office and the State Bureau of Investigation opened a criminal investigation into possible felony violations including communications fraud and money laundering. However, the investigation stalled for nearly two years until it was finally closed in March 2011, around the time that the statute of limitations would have expired. No criminal charges were ever filed in the case. Although an investigator interviewed several of Envision Ogden’s donors, there is no evidence that investigators ever contacted Mayor Godfrey or any of the political candidates who received funds from Envision Ogden.

As soon as the investigation was closed, Ogden activist and blogger Dan Schroeder filed a request for the Attorney General’s investigation records, under Utah’s Government Records Access Management Act (GRAMA). The AG responded by providing some records including a two-page report and several email messages sent among its staff, but withheld other records--most notably a collection of financial documents that it had obtained via subpoena from Envision Ogden’s bank.

Schroeder appealed the AG’s decision to withhold the bank records and a few others, and won a partial victory at the State Records Committee in August 2011. Both Schroeder and the AG then appealed this decision to Third District Court, where in October 2012 Judge Keith Kelly ruled in favor of the AG’s decision to withhold the records. Schroeder, now represented by attorneys at Parr Brown Gee & Loveless, then appealed Judge Kelly’s decision to the Utah Supreme Court.

The Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in this case at 9:00 a.m. on Wednesday, April 1, in the Matheson Courthouse, 450 South State Street, 5th Floor, in Salt Lake City.

The principal legal question before the court is whether GRAMA requires the government to disclose financial records obtained via subpoena in the course of a criminal investigation, even when none of GRAMA’s specific exemptions apply to those records. GRAMA does exempt many records from disclosure, for instance, when disclosure would constitute a clear violation of an individual’s privacy, or when a business would be put at a competitive disadvantage through disclosure of its financial records, or when disclosure would compromise an ongoing investigation. In this case, however, the investigation is over, while the financial records are those of a defunct political organization that has not made any privacy claim and that was already required by federal law to disclose its major financial transactions. The Attorney General argues that the Utah Constitution broadly protects the privacy of financial records even in such cases. Schroeder and his attorneys argue that the constitutional requirement was met when the Attorney General obtained the records through a valid subpoena, and that GRAMA provides no applicable exemptions in this case.

Besides the legal issues, this court's decision in this case will determine how much the public will ever learn about Envision Ogden and the Attorney General's investigation. Although the content of the withheld records is unknown, it is likely that they would shed further light on Envision Ogden's financial transactions, including transactions with the mysterious Friends of Northern Utah Real Estate. The records would also show what information the Attorney General's office had in hand when the decision was made to close the investigation without filing charges.

Copies of the legal briefs filed with the Supreme Court in this case are attached.

Tuesday, October 07, 2014

Question:
Members of Congress are regarded so poorly by the public. Time-share
salesmen are probably looked at more favorably. Is that a fair
assessment overall, and why are you an exception to that?

I
would have to say that this is a very accurate statement. Let’s
look at a couple facts: members of both the Democrat and Republican
Parties are known to “flip flop” their positions based on who is
in the majority at the time and also in regards to who is in the
White House. The easiest example is in regards debt ceiling
increases. When President Bush was in office, the Republicans
supported increases and Democrats opposed them. Now that President
Obama is in office, it has reversed.

There
are no principles in Washington, D.C. right now. We have two parties
that constantly change their position to gain favor, votes, or what
happens to be politically expedient for them at the time.

I
am not tied down to one of these two parties, and the agenda I have
isn’t Democrat or Republican solutions to follow a platform, but
solutions that work for all Americans. I’m also not beholden to any
special interest groups. Both Congressman Bishop and Donna McAleer
have their donor base, and going through their reports shows where
their bias exists. I avoid the appearance of evil by refusing to
take money from anyone other than a single voter and the Libertarian
Party of Utah.

Question:
Is the state or the federal government more competent to make
decisions on Utah’s public lands, and why?

Let
me answer with a question, if you will. Why doesn’t the federal
government believe that the people of Utah are competent to decide
what to do with the land?

The
fact is that Utah has some of the smartest people I’ve met. I’ve
gone and talked to thousands of voters throughout Northern Utah, and
I have met some of the most informed people in regards to the issues
at hand in our nation. We are innovators, entrepreneurs, and have
some of the best universities in America.

Congressman
Bishop wants control of Utah lands to be in Utah hands, and I am
inclined to agree. Donna McAleer is wanting control to be handled by
a group of people a few thousand miles away, not connected to the
issues that uniquely face Utah. I will always give the benefit of
the doubt to the people who live in an area.

And
let me state that the voters fully understand that we have to protect
much of the land to preserve our tourism industry. That is one of
the biggest economic factors in Utah, so to think that we are just
going to strip mine and drill the place into oblivion is an ill
informed position.

Question:
Should teachers be allowed to carry arms in schools, and if not, what
are some strong methods to protect our students?

I
believe if they receive training on how to use a firearm, they should
be able to carry. Currently, I do feel the standard for a teacher to
carry in the classroom is far too low. All you really need is a
concealed carry permit to be able to legally carry in a school.

I
think a common sense approach would be for tactical training groups
to teach the teachers how to properly respond to an active shooting
situation. There are already groups who have offered such classes
free of charge to teachers and faculty members, and I feel that it
should be expanded as a requirement for the teacher to carry.

Ultimately,
we are talking about the safety of children, and heaven forbid
something like Sandy Hook happen at Ben Lomond High School or Lincoln
Elementary. We protect just about everything with some sort of an
armed presence, and our children are the key to the future. We
should push for this training so the teacher knows how to properly
respond.

Question:
The recession is over, but there is a feeling of economic insecurity
among the middle class. Adjusted for inflation, the median wage is
the same as in 1989. What needs to be done to boost econmic security,
particularly for the middle class and new college students?

I
would argue that the recession really isn’t over, just a little
better. It’s time to look at a cold, hard reality; the government
has stuck its fingers where they don’t belong and it has prolonged
the stagnation of the economy.

If
you really want to have a booming economy, you have to get the
government to stop interfering. We need to take a hard look at the
regulations that impact business. Most big businesses can implement
just about any change the federal government wants, but those small
businesses are regulated out of business because it becomes too
costly to comply with the demands.

We
also need to take a real look at the tax code. I worked at the IRS
in the business division for three years, and I am going to tell you
that businesses are suffering in a very real way to stay afloat. If
you aren’t a Walmart, Exxon, or other big business, you are on the
verge of going out of business. I witnessed it with my own eyes.

My
solution is to get rid of all forms of taxation and replace it with
the Fair Tax. This is a point of purchase, or consumption tax on all
new goods. This of course would exclude things like food, since that
is a requirement to live, but all discretionary spending would have a
sales tax (so to speak) placed on it.

This
puts more power in the wallet of the person and ensures that the poor
and middle class are not affected since the necessities are not
taxed, but they keep 100% of what they earn. The more frugal you are,
the more money you have.

Question:
As we embark on what looks like another long chapter in the War on
Terror, what will Hill’s role be? Do you feel that you can
represent the base well and protect it from Base Realignment and
Closure (BRAC) elimination and cuts?

Before
I address Hill Air Force Base’s role, I would like to state my
opposition to what is happening in Iraq and Syria. I have been one
of the “boots on the ground” as a Marine Corps infantryman and
seen what American foreign policy leads to when we start intervening
around the globe. The results are not pretty. I have been there
when innocent people are caught in the crossfire and I lost twenty
three men I served with in Iraq, only so that we can go back again?
It’s absurd and it’s time we realize that we cannot get involved
every time something happens around the world.

Now,
as for Hill, since we are involved, obviously we are going to be the
hub for the new F-22, which has successfully been involved in combat
missions in Iraq and Syria in recent weeks. Since the Congress and
President decided we are going to be involved in the conflict, Hill’s
mission becomes very critical at this point to ensure our pilots have
well maintained aircraft that accomplish the mission and get them
back home to see their families.

As
a veteran from the ground side of a military campaign, I know how
important air support is, and Hill has one of the best groups in the
armed forces. When you are pinned down by enemy fighters, those F-16s
coming in are a lifesaver. Every member on Hill, civilian and Air
Force, are vital to national security and making sure we get our
beans, bullets, bandages and air support.

Question:
Are you satisfied with current efforts to improve air quality in our
state? If so, why, and if not, what do we need to do to improve it?

I
am not satisfied with efforts the state has been making. I have an
asthmatic step son and it is the same routine every winter: we will
end up at the hospital several times for him to get breathing
treatments.

Now,
Congressman Bishop would like to blame it solely on geography, and to
an extent, it is true. The basin does trap a lot of pollution, but
we need to address the causes of that pollution to ensure people can
breathe better.

Now,
federally, there isn’t much more we can do. There are EPA
regulations that are supposed to be followed, and I would have to
assume that they are enforced. So what more can be done? I do have
one thing I would like to do that would help lessen the impact, and
it is in regards to federal buildings.

I
would like to see every building the federal government uses in Utah
fitted with solar paneling so that they produce more of their own
electricity. I would also like to see a change on the lights in
federal buildings. When I worked security at the Junction in Ogden,
I would regularly see the IRS buildings and federal office building
on 25th
street. I worked graveyards and regularly saw lights remain on my
entire shift, long after the last employees would leave. This causes
unneeded electricity to be used, which not only impacts our air, but
the wallets of the taxpayers. It’s real easy on that one: turn off
the lights.

Question:
If elected to Congress what could you do to improve education in
Utah?

Education
is so important, because our children literally are the future of our
nation. What they learn today will impact our tomorrow. How do we
address the future? By getting out of the way. We have spent so much
time focusing on teaching children to pass a test (for money for the
school) that we have stopped teaching them how to think, and instead
teach them what to answer. This practice needs to stop.

We
also need to stop having teachers be assessed by those tests. I have
seen amazing teachers in my life step beyond the test and truly teach
children, only to be chastised by the administration because that
class didn’t deliver the results for more grant money. I’ve seen
the opposite hold true as well, where teachers who only teach to the
test are rewarded for essentially holding our children back.

We
also need to have school districts be able to get rid of bad
teachers. My brother told me a story of one of his teachers that
essentially just handed a packet to the class and had them read on
their own. No teaching, just reading a packet. That is not a
teacher, and someone like that should be fired. On the flip side of
this coin, good teachers need to be recognized often and publicly so
they get the credit they deserve.

Finally,
we need to address the problem of parental involvement with the
student. A teacher can only do so much. Parents really need to step
up and be involved with their kids. I think once the economy
improves and one parent can again be home with the kids, things will
get better, so the economy really ties into this since in many cases
both parents work.

Question:
If the case is accepted, how should the U.S. Supreme Court rule on
Utah’s gay-marriage ban?

The
Supreme Court really has no business being involved. Neither does any
level or branch of government. The only role for government is
contract enforcement when there is a harmed party. Two people
signing a contract that they will take care of one another,
regardless of their sexual preference, should have no government
influence unless there is a breach of that contract like cheating,
abuse, etc.

We
cannot bar consenting adults from forming a contract that would allow
for them to have protections given married individuals. It’s time
for the argument of who gets to define marriage to be left up to the
people, but no one gets to restrict a union.

Question:
What would you ask your opponents?

Congressman
Bishop: I would ask him why he only became fiscally responsible after
President Bush left. I mean, when you go back to his beginning of
holding office, he marched lock step with the Republican Party,
getting a dismal rating of 44% by the New American. Now all of a
sudden he’s the Tea Party, fiscal conservative champion? Sorry,
but I have a longer term memory.

Donna
McAleer: I would ask her what she honestly would do different than
towing the same talking points offered by countless Democrats that
have added to the gridlock and partisan politics in Washington, D.C.,
because as of now, I haven’t seen anything that counters what
Democrats already do.

Dwayne
Vance: I’d ask him why he think we need another lawyer in
Washington, D.C. It’s already infested with lawyers. We need more
people of diverse career paths.